Michael Hobbs wrote: > Can anyone find a flaw with this change in syntax? > > Instead of dividing a compound statement with a colon, why not divide it > on a newline? For example, the colon could be dropped from this statement: > if self.hungry: > self.eat() > to > if self.hungry > self.eat() > > Python is already sensitive to whitespace and the newline anyway, so why > not put it to good use? For example, Python rejects this statement > because of the newline present: > if self.hungry or > self.depressed: > self.eat() > You need to use the backslash to continue the expression on the next line: > if self.hungry or \ > self.depressed: > self.eat() > The colon that divides the statement therefore seems redundant. The > colon could continue to be used for single-line statements: > if self.hungry: self.eat() > > I think the colon could be omitted from every type of compound > statement: 'if', 'for', 'def', 'class', whatever. Am I missing anything? > > Thanks, > - Mike
It is a very good idea as the colon is technically redundant (not necessary for parsing, aside from one liners) and actually hurts readability (and writeability). The "evidence" people cite for the advantage of using a colon is research done by users of the ABC language, python's predecessor. They forget that A) that was like 20 years ago, B) the language was designed for children, and C) the keywords in ABC are IN ALL CAPS LIKE THIS (hurting readability and writeability) and thus adding a colon obviously helps restore some readability for users in that case but not in python's. However, python is far too old to accept any fundamental changes to syntax at this point. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
